I was today years old when I realised Princess Anne should be Queen

[monkeysox]

She's the eldest child. The law has changed now.
Even Zara Philips is behind her little brother in line to the throne. Wtf.

Because when you think you know something, you don't think to check.

@monkeysox Anne would be brilliant, I think she'd do it out if duty, but she'd hate it, so I'm pleased for her sake we have Charles .

She isnt the eldest.

If she were she would have been queen.

The only male heir thing was changed ages ago.

Our late queen was only queen because her father did not have a son. Things were different then.

I have to say I’ve only just found out that the rule wasn’t backdated. I knew it changed about 10 years ago so Charlotte is above Louis, but hadnt clocked it didn’t affect Anne, Louise etc.

Quite apart from the fact that the Queen's children were born in the order of Charles, Anne, Andrew and Edward. 😉🤣

The Queen would not automatically have been Queen if her Uncle hadent abdicated, when she was born Her dad was Duke of York so had Edward not abdicated abdicated married a " suitable " wife and had children, the Queen would have been in Beatrice, s position.

We don't change laws retrospectively. It only applies to new laws. Generally I like to know what I am doing legally today isn't going to be made criminal when it was legal at the time I did it.

The rule to end male primogeniture applies only to girls born after 2011.

I think that was an early Celtic approach.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tanistry

"Historically the tanist was chosen from among the heads of the roydammna or "righdamhna" (literally, those of kingly material) or, alternatively, among all males of the sept, and elected by them in full assembly. The eligibility was based on patrilineal relationship, which meant the electing body and the eligibles were agnates with each other. The composition and the governance of the clan were built upon male-line descent from a similar ancestor."

and

"The royal succession in Celtic Scotland was limited to the elective agnatic or male line of the Siol Alpein (House of Alpin) until the accession of King Malcolm II in 1005. This monarch was the first to introduce the concept of hereditary monarchy in Scotland. He did so to try to eliminate the strife caused by the elective law, which encouraged rival claimants to fight for the throne. Since Malcolm had only daughters, he also introduced the right of female-line succession in Scotland. This gave rise to conflict by competitors for generations thereafter."

👏👏👏👏

Lots to thank Dianna for!!

Shame we can’t argue that Charles was divorced, married a Catholic divorcee, and make Anne Queen anyway. She’d be awesome!

That was in response to "you’ve got to love the ‘Anne should be queen’ royalists who DO realise Charles is the eldest. Passionately believe in hereditary privilege AND want to select on merit. Actually, maybe that could work - like a sort of royal ‘Britain’s got talent’…" the traditions I mentioned seemed to cause some conflicts as you might expect

OP I’m sure the MN massive have already roasted you re. Charles and Anne’s birth order.

You’re definitely onto something though. As Princess Anne is the Queen’s second child, she should really be next in line after Lilibet so eighth in line.

I can’t for one minute imagine that she’d want that for herself and her children. Nevertheless, it’s a matter of principle.

Ooooh the self appointed tone police are awake early on a Sunday. Check yourself… honestly who do you think you are? 😂😂😂

Anne still wouldn't be Queen if Charles wasn't King though

difference between an Heir Apparent and an Heir Presumptive

Heir apparent - it's not possible for anyone to come between this person and the throne. E.g. William.
Heir presumptive - will inherit as things stand but it could change. Elizabeth II was only ever heir presumptive because in theory her parents could have had a third, male child who, by the rules of the time, would have come before her.

We had a Queen as there were no pesky little brothers waiting in the wings. An Heir and a spare (who was also female) meant a queen was inevitable.

I'd also add:

"No is a complete sentence."
"You do you."
"He's definitely..."
"I was literally..."

and

"He's gaslighting you..."

to a list of hackneyed phrases.

I really hope that MNHQ don't start letting posters delete threads because they're embarrassed at being too lazy to use a search engine.

And yes, the phrase "Today Years Old" is just cringeworthy.

I assume the reason why males inherited the Crown in preference to females was that they were expected to lead their armies into battle.

George II was the last British king to actually engage in battle with his troops in 1743.

Don’t let facts get in the way of a post OP.

I’ve never heard of “today years old”

I thought there was a word missing but couldn’t work out what or where it would be

Not 100% true if Harry and all his children did for some reason not take the crown. then it goes to Andrew then his daughters. then Edward and his 2 children THEN Anne.. So it is not the "next" of the queen's children after Charles' issue.

After George's birth due to the change, it will be the "next" so when George becomes king if he has no children then Charlotte will be next in line.
obviously, as soon as the heir has children it pushes down the line.

When Elizabeth went to the throne her sister was 2nd to inherit now her son is 24th in line to the throne,

Do people still say ‘today years old’? I knew a few people were trying to make this happen a couple of years back but it didn’t catch on.

Except Charles is the eldest…